Difference between revisions of "Globalisation:Information Operations Task Force"

From Powerbase
Jump to: navigation, search
Line 1: Line 1:
 
==Introduction==
 
==Introduction==
The Information Operations Task Force was an organisation within the US Department of Defense which paid Iraqi newspapers to disseminate news stories written by American military sources which presented a favourable image of the American action in the country. Although the news stories were truthful they presented a one sided view of the news and the editors of the newspapers in question were not always aware that what they were printing was essentially propoganda from the US Government. <ref>, Los Angeles Times[http://articles.latimes.com/2005/nov/30/world/fg-infowar30], Accessed on 15-Feb-2010</ref>
+
the Information Operations Task Force is a military organisation based in Baghdad and is part of the multinational corps headquarters commanded by Army Lt. Gen. John R. Vines.<ref>, Los Angeles Times[http://articles.latimes.com/2005/nov/30/world/fg-infowar30], Accessed on 15-Feb-2010</ref> The Information Operations Task Force was an organisation which provided news stories to the US Department of Defense which subsequentially paid Iraqi newspapers to disseminate news stories written by American military sources which presented a favourable image of the American action in the country. Although the news stories were largely truthful they presented a one sided view of the news and the editors of the newspapers in question were not always aware that what they were printing was essentially propoganda from the US Government. <ref>, Los Angeles Times[http://articles.latimes.com/2005/nov/30/world/fg-infowar30], Accessed on 15-Feb-2010</ref>
 +
 
 +
==Lincoln Group==
 +
 
 +
The pentagon signed a contract with Lincoln Group, a Washington based defence contractor, with a maximum value of $100M to
 +
 
 +
==Implications==
 +
 
 +
Although there is no law against the US military carrying out psychological operations or disseminating news through foriegn media. It is illegal, through US law, for them to do this within the United States. It has been argued by a private contractor to the Pentagon that, "There is no longer any way to separate foreign media from domestic media. Those neat lines don't exist anymore."<ref>, Los Angeles Times [http://articles.latimes.com/2005/nov/30/world/fg-infowar30?pg=3], Accessed on 15-Feb-2010</ref>. if this is accepted as the case then it is possible that the stories published in Iraqq ccould be picked up and run by US media outlets in which case the law would have been broken.
 +
 
  
 
==Notes==
 
==Notes==
 
<references/>
 
<references/>

Revision as of 12:29, 16 February 2010

Introduction

the Information Operations Task Force is a military organisation based in Baghdad and is part of the multinational corps headquarters commanded by Army Lt. Gen. John R. Vines.[1] The Information Operations Task Force was an organisation which provided news stories to the US Department of Defense which subsequentially paid Iraqi newspapers to disseminate news stories written by American military sources which presented a favourable image of the American action in the country. Although the news stories were largely truthful they presented a one sided view of the news and the editors of the newspapers in question were not always aware that what they were printing was essentially propoganda from the US Government. [2]

Lincoln Group

The pentagon signed a contract with Lincoln Group, a Washington based defence contractor, with a maximum value of $100M to

Implications

Although there is no law against the US military carrying out psychological operations or disseminating news through foriegn media. It is illegal, through US law, for them to do this within the United States. It has been argued by a private contractor to the Pentagon that, "There is no longer any way to separate foreign media from domestic media. Those neat lines don't exist anymore."[3]. if this is accepted as the case then it is possible that the stories published in Iraqq ccould be picked up and run by US media outlets in which case the law would have been broken.


Notes

  1. , Los Angeles Times[1], Accessed on 15-Feb-2010
  2. , Los Angeles Times[2], Accessed on 15-Feb-2010
  3. , Los Angeles Times [3], Accessed on 15-Feb-2010